Label for enabling verification of an object

ABSTRACT

A label for enabling verification of an object includes a scannable region that enables determination of auto-acquired unique spatial orientation of the scannable region with respect to a reference thereby enabling determination of a spatial orientation of the label with respect to the reference. The label is applied onto the object and a change in the spatial orientation of the label indicates tampering of the label, thereby enabling verification of the object. Further, a method for detecting tampering of an object includes providing label on the object. The label has at least a portion which is scannable region with a plurality of patterns and is associated with an external reference point. Further, the method includes determining a first and a second spatial orientations of the label based on computation between the patterns and the reference point, and generating an alert on noticing a change between first and second spatial orientations.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED PATENT APPLICATIONS

This present application is a continuation under 35 U.S.C. §120 of U.S.patent application Ser. No. 14/252,392, filed Apr. 14, 2014, which is acontinuation under 35 U.S.C. §120 of U.S. patent application Ser. No.13/590,871, filed Aug. 21, 2012, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,740,076, which inturn is a continuation in part under 35 U.S.C. §120 of U.S. patentapplication Ser. No. 13/521,733, filed Jul. 11, 2012, which in turn is aU.S. National Stage Application under 35 U.S.C. §371 of InternationalApplication No. PCT/IB2011/050859, filed on Mar. 1, 2011, which in turnclaims the priority under 35 U.S.C. §119(a) of Indian Provisional PatentApplication No. 625/CHE/2010, filed Mar. 10, 2010. The entire contentsof the foregoing applications are herein incorporated by reference intheir entirety.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The disclosed subject matter generally relates to the field of objectidentification labels, and more particularly but not exclusively, toenable content verification.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In various industries, objects and consignments are labelled to track,identify and verify genuineness of said objects and consignments.However, a plaguing problem relates to tampering and counterfeiting ofsuch labels, which leads to substantial losses.

One of the common problems is that a person with malicious intent canremove a label affixed on an object. This label can be later affixed ona counterfeit object.

Another problem relates to malpractice committed by insiders who haveaccess to genuine labels. In many scenarios, insiders steal genuinelabels and facilitate application of the genuine labels on counterfeitobjects.

Yet another problem relates to counterfeiting of labels, which isrelatively easy in light of the currently available technologies.

The above cited problems, among many others, which can be referred to asmalpractice, lead to substantial losses. Hence, conventionaltechnologies have tried to address some of the aforementioned problems.

In one of the conventional approaches, labels with invisible images areaffixed to objects. Presence of such images in the labels makescounterfeiting difficult. However, it has been found that, even suchlabels can be successfully counterfeited by using currently availabletechnologies. Further disadvantage is that, this approach does notaddress the problem related to removal of affixed genuine labels onobjects and thereafter, applying the label on counterfeit objects. Yetanother disadvantage is that, this approach does not address the problemrelated to insiders stealing genuine labels and facilitating applicationof such genuine labels on counterfeit objects.

In another conventional approach, labels with random signatures aremanufactured by doping resonators within plastic. A disadvantageassociated with this approach is that, it does not address the problemrelated to removal of affixed genuine labels on objects and thereafter,applying the label on counterfeit objects. Yet another disadvantage isthat, this approach does not address the problem related to insidersstealing genuine labels and facilitating application of such genuinelabels on counterfeit objects.

Few more conventional technologies, which have similar disadvantages,include nano-fingerprinting, bubble-tag and radio frequencyidentification labels.

In light of the foregoing discussion, there is a need for a technique toaddress the problem associated with removal of genuine labels affixed onobjects and applying of such labels on counterfeit objects. Further, thetechnique shall address the problem associated with insiders with accessto genuine labels, who steal genuine labels and facilitate applicationof the genuine labels on counterfeit objects. Furthermore, the techniqueshall address the problem associated with counterfeiting of labels,among other problems.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Embodiments are illustrated by way of example and not by way oflimitation in the accompanying figures. For simplicity and clarity ofillustration, elements illustrated in the figures are not necessarilydrawn to scale. For example, the dimensions of some elements may beexaggerated relative to other elements for clarity.

FIG. 1 illustrates a view 001 of the label as viewed by a naked eye andview 002 of the same label as viewed by a machine, in accordance with anembodiment;

FIG. 2 illustrates a view of the label as viewed by a naked eye and viewof the same label as viewed by a machine in accordance with anembodiment;

FIG. 3 illustrates two labels applied to the consignment, as viewed bynaked eye, in accordance with an embodiment;

FIGS. 4 a and 4 b illustrate images of the consignment taken by amachine at a first location, in accordance with an embodiment;

FIGS. 5 a and 5 b illustrate images of the consignment taken by amachine at a second location, in accordance with an embodiment;

FIGS. 6 a and 6 b illustrate images of a consignment taken by a machineat a first location and second location, respectively, in accordancewith an embodiment;

FIGS. 7 a and 7 b illustrate difference between images taken atdifferent locations, in accordance with an embodiment;

FIGS. 8 a and 8 b illustrate a first and second reference images of aconsignment comprising five objects, in accordance with an embodiment;

FIG. 9 illustrates a label applied on the opening edge of an object, inaccordance with an embodiment;

FIG. 10 illustrates a label applied to an object that includes a tagwhich comprises unique identification data corresponding to the object,in accordance with an embodiment;

FIG. 11 illustrates a form of label, in accordance with an embodiment;

FIG. 12 illustrates captured image of labels applied to currency bundlesthat are housed in a currency box, in accordance with an embodiment;

FIG. 13 illustrates x-ray imaging of box padded with thermocol likematerial block to ensure radio-transparent media in path of x-ray beamwith two circular labels under plastic strapping, such that, anypilferage requires tampering with strapping and results in change inspatial orientation of labels (019) and (020), in accordance with anembodiment;

FIG. 14 illustrates two machine vision system to monitor top and bottomview and detect intrusion through sides or edges of a consignment, inaccordance with an embodiment;

FIG. 15 illustrates scannable regions with varied dimensions withinsmall range provided on the label, in accordance with an embodiment;

FIG. 16 a illustrates label used along with elastic strapping onconsignment, wherein the elastic strapping includes pre-printedscannable reference markings, in accordance with an embodiment;

FIG. 16 b illustrates change III spatial orientation when a consignmentillustrated in FIG. 16 a is tampered, in accordance with an embodiment;

FIG. 17 illustrates 3 labels applied to an object, in accordance with anembodiment; and

FIG. 18 illustrates labels used along with known tracking andanticounterfeit technologies, in accordance with various embodiments.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

In the following description, numerous specific details such asimplementations, types and interrelationships of system components, areset forth in order to provide a more thorough understanding of thepresent application. It will be appreciated, however, by one skilled inthe art that the application may be practiced without such specificdetails. Various low level details which are not directly related toapplication or full instruction sequence have not been shown in detailin order not to obscure the application. Those of ordinary skill in theart, with the included descriptions, will be able to implementappropriate functionality without undue experimentation.

References III the specification to “embodiment”, indicate that theembodiment described may include a particular feature, structure, orcharacteristic, but every embodiment may not necessarily include theparticular feature, structure, or characteristic. Moreover, such phrasesare not necessarily referring to the same embodiment. Further, when aparticular feature, structure, or characteristic is described inconnection with an embodiment, it is submitted that it is within theknowledge of one skilled in the art to affect such feature, structure orcharacteristic in connection with other embodiments whether or notexplicitly described.

In this document, the terms “a” or “an” are used, as is common in patentdocuments, to include one or more than one. In this document, the term“or” is used to refer to a nonexclusive “or,” such that “A or B”includes “A but not B,” “B but not A,” and “A and B,” unless otherwiseindicated. Furthermore, all publications, patents, and patent documentsreferred to in this document are incorporated by reference herein intheir entirety, as though individually incorporated by reference. In theevent of inconsistent usages between this document and those documentsso incorporated by reference, the usage in the incorporated reference(s)should be considered supplementary to that of this document; forirreconcilable inconsistencies, the usage in this document controls.

Embodiments disclose techniques for enabling determination of tamperingor counterfeiting of labels, thereby, facilitating verification ofobjects. Objects, for example, may include, electronic objects,documents, goods and containers used is packaging and shipping, amongother such objects.

In one embodiment, verification of an object is enabled by applying alabel to the object. Spatial orientation of the label is determined at afirst location. Thereafter, at a second location, the spatialorientation of the label is again determined. The spatial orientation ofthe label determined at the first and second locations are compared. Anexistence of difference determined upon comparison indicates tamperingor counterfeiting of the label, hence, enabling verification of theobject.

In an embodiment, the label includes a scannable region. Counterfeitingor tampering of labels is identified by determining spatial orientationof the scannable region of the label with respect to a reference. In anembodiment, the scannable region can be a radio opaque layer. The radioopaque layer may be distinctively scannable from rest of label. FIG. 11illustrates a form of label, in accordance with an embodiment. In thislabel, both the label and the scannable region are circular.

In an embodiment, the scannable region may be invisible to a naked eye,while being capable of being scanned by a machine. FIG. 1 illustrates aview 001 of the label as viewed by a naked eye and view 002 of the samelabel as viewed by a machine. In this embodiment, the scannable regionmay be radio opaque.

In another embodiment, the scannable region is made invisible to nakedeye by disposing the scannable region between layers of the label. Suchan arrangement, can be referred to as sandwiching. The first layerhaving a first color, a second layer having a second color and thescannable region is disposed between the first layer and the secondlayer. The scannable region may have a color distinct from the colors ofthe first layer and the second layer.

As an example, in an exemplary embodiment, scannable region is black incolor, while the layers between which the scannable region is sandwichedare of red and blue in color. Such a combination can make the scannableregion visible under infra-red illumination. Similarly, skilled artisansshall appreciate that many other color combinations can be employed tomake the scannable region invisible.

It may be noted that, the label may include more than two layers.Including more than two layers facilitates disguising the scannableregion from naked eye.

In another embodiment, the scannable region may be visible to a nakedeye and also capable of being scanned by a machine. FIG. 15 illustratesa label, which includes scannable region visible to naked eye, inaccordance with an embodiment. The label illustrated in FIG. 15 includesmultiple visible geometric patterns of similar shape but of varyingdimensions within small range. Including such pattern renders itdifficult for a human eye to differentiate between them. However,machines can be configured to differential between the patterns andselect appropriate pattern(s) to facilitate determination of spatialorientation of the label. In the example illustrated by FIG. 15,patterns 021 and 022 are considered for computing spatial orientation oflabel. In another form, patterns can be of same or varying size but indifferent colors and machine selects certain patterns of specific colorsto compute spatial orientation of label and information about specificpattern selected is maintained for performing subsequent.

In an embodiment, a label can include scannable region, wherein someportion of the scannable region is visible to naked eye, while otherportion of the scannable region is invisible to naked eye.

In an embodiment, label or scannable region within label, for example,may be delivered by using one or more of printing, punching, layeringand optically variable device with dynamic color shift effecttechnologies, among other technologies.

In an embodiment, scannable region, for example, may include one or moreof, geometric shapes, alpha-numeric character and symbols, among othershapes. The scannable region shall not be construed to be limited to anyspecific shape or dimension.

The label IS configured to be applied to an object that may requireverification. The labels can be applied to the object, for example,manually or by automatic applicator, or a combination of both.

The shape of the label may be such that, it makes it difficult toreplicate the orientation. In an embodiment, the label, for example, canbe circular. In case of a circular label, if the label is removed, itwill be difficult to re-apply the same label or apply a different labelin the same orientation as the previously applied label. In light of theforegoing discussion, skilled artisans shall appreciate that many othershapes may be employed for making it difficult to replicate theorientation. Such shapes shall be within the scope of the claims.

In an embodiment, a method for verifying objects is provided. The methodemploys application of the label to the object. The label when appliedauto-acquires unique signatures, each time it is applied and re-appliedon the object. The auto-acquiring of unique signature can meangenerating a unique signature based on the spatial orientation of thescannable region of the label with respect to a reference associatedwith the object. Further, the label will auto-lose its unique signature,when removed from the object and thus cannot be scanned in isolation.Auto-loosing of unique signature could mean, even when the same label isreapplied or replaced by a different label, the previously auto-acquiredunique signature cannot be replicated. The replication may not bepossible, as the orientation of the scannable region of the reappliedlabel would be different from the orientation of the scannable region,when applied initially.

It shall be noted that, the scannable region may be illustrated asstraight line, triangles or circles, but is not limited to shapes thatare illustrated, as the same can be manufactured in different shapes.The methodology of application of labels to (inside or outside) theobjects may depend on customized requirements of specific deployments.

In an embodiment, X-ray and computed tomography technologies can beapplied to determine spatial orientation of the scannable region withrespect to a reference. It shall be noted that, alternative technologiesmay also be leveraged, within the scope of the claims, to determine thesame.

In an embodiment, more than one label can be applied to the object. Eachof the labels can act as the reference to the other. It may be notedthat, using multiple labels can generate substantial number of uniquecombination at a given precision of spatial orientation measurement.FIG. 17 illustrates 3 labels applied to an object, in accordance with anembodiment. Considering 0.05 degree precision of spatial orientationmeasurement, three adjacent label arrangement generates more than 300billion unique combinations.

In an embodiment, two concentric labels can be used, wherein one of thelabels has scannable region for which spatial orientation is computedwith respect to the other label, which has a reference point orreference axis.

In an embodiment, a distinctively recognisable portion of the object,such as an opening edge or corner of the object, is considered as thereference for determining the spatial orientation of the label. FIG. 9illustrates a label applied on the opening edge of an object, inaccordance with an embodiment. In FIG. 9, scannable region 016 is oftriangular shape. The scannable region in this embodiment is madeinvisible to a naked eye, wherein the scannable region is imprinted onlayer 015 of the label, which is not exposed to the outer world. Thelabel is applied to the opening edge 014 of the object. The spatialorientation is computed with respect to the opening edge 014.

In an embodiment, an unique signature can be generated by using spatialorientation of the label and unique identification data associated withthe object on which the label is applied.

FIG. 10 illustrates a label applied to an object that includes a tagwhich comprises unique identification data corresponding to the object,in accordance with an embodiment. Spatial orientation of the label iscomputed by measuring angle and distance of the scannable region 014Aand 014B with respect to the reference 014C. The reference in this caseis provided on the tag. In an embodiment, spatial orientation iscomputed at a location and the same may be stored in a database inassociation with the unique identification data. Subsequently, spatialorientation is again computed at a second location and is compared withdata in the database, wherein the unique identification data is used asa reference to lookup data in the database.

Some of the embodiments enable imaging of the label in a directionagnostic manner, thereby eliminating the need to orient the item to beimaged, imaging device or label in a specific direction.

In an embodiment, the measured spatial orientation of the label isconverted and encrypted to human readable string and uploaded on amonitoring portal tagged with unique identification data, date and timeof scan. During uploading of credential, it is recommended that asecured network is used and scanner authenticates itself by way ofdigital certificate to the monitoring portal.

In one embodiment, 360 degree verification of content using single scanis provided. In this embodiment, the object can be strapped using anelastic band. FIG. 16 a illustrates an object being strapped using anelastic band, in accordance with an embodiment. The elastic band haspre-printed scannable reference markings. These reference markings alongwith spatial orientation of label forms 360 degree tamper detectioncredential as shown in FIG. 16 b, to detect repackaging of box afterintrusion from one or more sides or edges of the object. In an exemplaryembodiment, the elastic band may be colored deep red with scannablereference markings in black and laminated by deep blue color semitransparent tape. Other color combinations are understood by thoseskilled in the art.

In an embodiment, 360 degree verification of content is provided withoutusing elastic band. In this embodiment, the consignment can be oftrapezoidal shape. Two machine vision system in one single scan canmonitor top and bottom view to detect any cut and hence any intrusionthrough sides or edges as shown in FIG. 14. Further if two machinevision systems are not to be used, then one single machine vision systemcan monitor one side on which label is applied, and another sides of thetrapezoidal consignment are scanned in its mirror view, provided box isstationed on platform with capability to project mirror view of one sideto machine vision system.

In one embodiment, to provide enhanced security, the label can bepunched. The label may be punched in an area other than the scannableregion. The label may be punched prior to application on the object.This increase the security against tampering. The increased security isdue to the fact that, even if a person replicates spatial orientation ofthe label, it may be hard to replicate the exact punch location in thelabel.

In an embodiment, multiple scannable regions with varied dimensionswithin narrow range are provided on the label. Such scannable regionswith varied dimensions increase the level of security against tamperingeven without invisible patterns. Embedded software is provided inmachine vision system to select one or more scannable regions ofspecific dimension to compute angle and distance with respect to areference. It may be noted that an intruder would not know which of thescannable regions are selected to compute, thereby enhancing securityagainst tampering. In an embodiment, while uploading credentials, thisadditional data is also recorded for use in subsequent authenticationfor tamper-detection. FIG. 15 illustrates scannable regions with varieddimensions within narrow range provided on the label, in accordance withan embodiment. Provision of such scannable regions makes it illusionaryto human eye, thereby enhancing security. Scanners can detect targetscannable regions 021 and 022, and can measure precise dimensions,considered for computing spatial orientation of label. Such enhancementsmake labels extremely secured from any insider threat.

In an embodiment, label is unified with tracking technologies. Exampleof tracking technologies includes radio frequency identification tag,magnetic stripe tag, barcode and QR-code, among others. Unifying labelwith tracking technologies enable verification of tampering orcounterfeiting of such technologies, based on spatial orientation. FIG.18 illustrates labels used along with known tracking and anticounterfeittechnologies, in accordance with various embodiments.

In an embodiment, a method of verifying content in a consignment isprovided. The method includes associating a unique identification tagfor a consignment, wherein the consignment houses multiple objects. Atleast one label is applied to each object housed in the consignment. Ata first location, at least one image of the consignment is captured. Theimage may be captured based on multiple pre determined parametersselected with respect to the unique identification tag. Subsequently, ata second location, at least one image of the consignment is againcaptured based on multiple pre determined parameters selected withrespect to the unique identification tag. The images captured at the twolocations are used to determine a relative spatial orientation index.The relative spatial orientation index being representative of thecollective spatial orientation of each of the objects in theconsignment; and generating an alert upon detecting the difference inspatial orientation between the two images.

FIG. 1 illustrates a view 001 of the label as viewed by a naked eye andview 002 of the same label as viewed by a machine. Similarly, FIG. 2illustrates a view of the label as viewed by a naked eye and view of thesame label as viewed by a machine. Comparison between the two figuresshows that the label has been tampered, as can be seen in machine view,while the location of the label appears to be the same to a naked eye.

In another example, FIGS. 3, 4 a, 4 b, 5 a, 5 b illustrate verificationof objects within a consignment. FIG. 3 illustrates two labels appliedto the consignment, as viewed by naked eye. It shall be noted that,apart from applying labels to the consignment, a label is applied toeach object housed in the consignment. FIGS. 4 a and 4 b illustrateimages of the consignment taken by a machine at a first location. Itshall be noted that the images illustrated are those of the scannableregions of the labels applied to the objects. For sake of simplicity,the images of the scannable regions of the labels applied to theconsignment are not illustrated in FIGS. 4 a, 4 b, 5 a and 5 b. FIGS. 5a and 5 b illustrate images of the consignment taken by a machine at asecond location. Comparison between images captured at the two locationsindicates a missing object. Hence, it may be noted that, apart fromdetecting tampering or counterfeiting of labels, the labels can also beused for counting the objects.

Another example is illustrated using FIGS. 6 a and 6 b. FIG. 6 aillustrates an image of the consignment taken by a machine at a firstlocation. Similarly, 6 b illustrates an image of the consignment takenby a machine at a second location. The consignment houses multipleobjects with a label attached to each object. Comparison between theimages captured at both the locations indicates change in orientation ofone of the labels, thereby indicating tampering.

In an embodiment, labels may be applied to currency bundles to checktampering. FIG. 12 illustrates captured image of labels applied tocurrency bundles that are housed in a currency box, in accordance withan embodiment. To a naked eye, all labels applied to the bundles appearto be the same. However, upon application, orientation of the scannableregion of the labels is determined. Even if same label is re-applied atthe same location on the bundle, the spatial orientation of the label(scannable region) will not be the same. Hence, tampering can bedetected.

In an exemplary embodiment, the labels may be circular in shape. Thediameter of the label may be greater than the diameter of the scannableregion. These labels may be applied on the objects at a designatedplace. The image of the label that is closest to the imaging capturedevice (for example flat panel detector in X-ray machine) will belarger. The variation in the size of the images of the labels indicatesthe variation in the number of the items.

FIGS. 7 a and 7 b illustrate difference between images taken atdifferent locations, in accordance with an embodiment. FIG. 7 aillustrates an image taken at a first location. In this embodiment, alabel is applied to each of the objects at a predefined location on theobject. Subsequently, the objects are stacked in rows and columns withina consignment. Further, an image of the consignment is captured,preferable from top view. The image of the labels facing the imagingdevice is captured. It shall be noted that size of each label within theimage depends on the distance of the label from the imaging device. Todetect tampering, an image of the consignment is captured at a secondlocation. This image is illustrated in FIG. 7 b. As seen in the figures,there is a difference in size of the label (compare 010 and all)captured at different locations. This difference is a result of one ormore objects missing from the consignment, because of which, a labelfacing the imaging device is moved further down.

The above embodiment, may use a flat panel detector x-ray imagingmachine. Further, the above embodiment may be suitable when all itemswithin the consignment are of standard size and shape.

In an embodiment, more than one label can be applied on each item toeffectively rule out possibility of exact overlapping of the images, bycombining mathematical probability with multiple labels.

In an embodiment, a method of acquiring the reference images comprisesacquiring a first reference image using a first set of predeterminedparameters and acquiring a second reference image using a second set ofpredetermined parameters. The predetermined parameters may include angleand location of an imaging device with respect to the object tagged withlabel.

Further, the test images are acquired using the same set ofpredetermined parameters that are used for acquiring reference images.Therefore, the method of acquiring the test images comprises acquiring afirst test image using the first set of predetermined parameters andacquiring a second test image using the second set of predeterminedparameters.

One or more reference Images are acquired at a first position of theconsignment. Multiple reference images can be taken from multiple sidesof the consignment, such that, overlapped orientation (FIG. 4 a) andindividual orientation (FIG. 4 b) are received. The reference imageshows overlapped imaging of randomly orientated radio-opaque layers fromdifferent labels associated with multiple objects stacked in theconsignment. Reference image indexed with unique-ID of the consignmentis sent to central server for storage or further processing.

During reference imaging, each consignment is tagged with a randomlygenerated unique identification data which is applied on theconsignment, preferably, on the same side on which the reference imagehas been taken. Unique reference image of each consignment is digitallysigned and during comparison, reference image is fetched indexed withunique-Id of consignment. Subsequent, imaging may be taken from sameside on which the reference image was taken. For added protection ofnetwork channel fetching reference image can be crypto-protected usingknown protocols like IPSEC (IP Security/SSL (Secured Socket Layer).

The method further comprises obtaining at least one image capturingparameter associated with each of the reference and the test image, theimage capturing parameter being associated with acquisition environmentof the image. The image capturing parameter comprises one of thepredetermined parameter, a location and at least one temporal parameterassociated with image acquisition.

Subsequent to obtaining the image capturing parameter, the methodcomprises associating the relative spatial orientation index with theunique identification tag and the image capturing parameter forgenerating an image data and transmitting the image data to a monitoringunit. The monitoring unit may comprise one of a web server, a storageunit and a computational unit.

In an embodiment, each of the reference image and the test image may benormalized prior to comparison. For this purpose, each of the referenceimage and the test image can be subtracted with image of standard emptyconsignments prior to being compared, as wooden or corrugated packagingmay include metallic parts such as nails that are radio opaque as well.

Image normalization further includes neutralizing the effects caused byvaried (horizontal and vertical) motions of the objects within theconsignment during transit. Full image of consignment is cropped inmultiple portions length-wise and height-wise wherein, each croppedportion represents items stacked depth-wise. Horizontal movementdetection is done by subtracting of cropped portion from respectivecropped portion from reference image and second subtraction of croppedportion from reference image from respective cropped portion from thetest image. After these two subtractions image can be verified for ahorizontal shift. Horizontal shift of objects within box, is normal intransit and still spatial orientation of imaging of pattern with respectto vertical axis does not get changed and objects can be counted andtheir originality attested as well.

In one specific application, the content verification method can beemployed to count the items inside a consignment without opening theconsignment. In this embodiment, each of the labels applied to variousitems within the consignment may comprise identical layering ofradio-opaque material but spatial orientation of internal identicallayering in each of label differs and auto-acquired during application.

In an alternate embodiment, each of the reference image and the testimage may count the number of images created by the radio opaquematerials in each consignment. However, to rule out the possibility ofsignificant overlap of the images created by the radio opaque materialsof the multiple labels, multiple reference images can be obtained withdifferent set of image capturing parameters.

In one exemplary embodiment, the image capturing parameters can bevaried by varying the angle of image capture. Accordingly, the countconflict (deficiency due to exact overlap of patterns in direction ofX-ray beam) can be resolved by employing angular x-ray which is achievedby rotating the consignment at a prescribed angle on the conveyor beltof x-ray machine. In angular x-ray hidden pattern gets exposed.

With reference to FIGS. 8 a and 8 b, considering there are five itemsstacked depth-wise, FIG. 8 a (012) shows images of only four labels asone pattern is hidden due to overlap. Subsequent to the rotation of theconsignment the fifth label gets exposed (013) in angular x-ray, asshown in diagram 8 b. It is shown that an area of 1 inch×1 inch iscropped from full consignment imaging, which represents imaging of fiveitems stack depth-wise at given row and column. In angular x-ray anelongated area 1 inch×1.5 inch is cropped, wherein hidden pattern ‘E’ isexposed and this information is digitally recorded during referenceimage itself and can be verified with the test image.

In another embodiment, count of partially overlapped circular pattern inx-ray imaging is described. This method is only applicable to circularpatterns that are partially overlapped. This method exploits the factthat as circle is traversed along its circumference, then aggregatedvalue of absolute difference (whether positive or negative) of bothx-coordinate and y-coordinate between two equidistant points oncircumference remains same. If two or more circles are partiallyoverlapping then the periphery will not be geometrically circular and inthat case aggregated value of absolute difference of x-coordinate andy-coordinate will not remain same for same distance parsed along theedge of overlapped pattern. Each time the aggregated value of absolutedifferences in x-coordinate and y-coordinate changes, the count ofoverlapped pattern is increased, and this traversal continues tilloriginal start point on periphery of pattern is reached.

In alternate embodiment of content verification, full box can bestrapped and labels placed under tight strapping. For any intrusion tobe made, the strapping will be cut and spatial orientation of labels(019) and (020) will get changed as shown in FIG. 13. If box containsmetallic items then labels can be placed along with radio transparentmaterial block, such as, thermocol, in the direction of X-ray beam toget imaging of spatial orientation.

One theoretical threat applicable to both embodiments described, is thatinsider can use same imaging device to acquire the imaging of invisiblepatterns in one embodiment OR radio-opaque pattern in another embodimentto replicate the credential. This particular threat can be taken care byreference imaging to be acquired by imaging device by varying heights(or distance from object), heuristically, such that, while spatialorientation remains same, distance and dimensions of geometric patternwill get changed. This additional data of height (or distance) will alsobe uploaded and indexed in database with unique identification number ofobject. During every subsequent scanning, imaging device willauto-adjust its height (or distance from object) to acquire imaging.Insider has no idea that reference image was taken from what height (ordistance from object) and thus he will not be able to replicate by justtaking the imaging even after having access to identical imaging device.

In embodiment of tamper detection, if label is used to seal opening edgeof box it can so happen that intrusion is done by doing a centre linecut without disturbing the spatial orientation. Though line cut isdetected by scanner by sometime fine line cut in bad lighting conditionmay not be detected. In such cases a thin metallic (or any hardmaterial) thin disc is first applied symmetrically along the openingedge and then the label (which is bigger diameter than disc) is appliedon top. As result any centre line cut will have to cut-through the discand this will either make line-cut very evident OR damage the labelitself and thus intrusion is detected.

The advantages of the embodiments described above include 360 degreeaccountability, verifiability and audit-ability for users,auto-acquisition of credential exactly at time of application, inabilityto scan in isolation prevents decoupling the label from the associateditem and thereby avoiding generation of false impression of assetintegrity. Further, the labels described herein can be associated withinformation tags such as barcode and RFID that can be printed (orintegrated) on labels that facilitates tracking of the associated item.The methods of tamper detection and content verification describedherein provide tangible evidence and hence are legally admissible.

In an embodiment, a system that can include one or more elementsdiscussed in the foregoing description is provided to enableverification of objects or consignments. A person skilled in the art canunderstand the configuration of the system in light of the foregoingdescription.

In various embodiments, a label, method and system for verifying objectsare described. However, the embodiments are not limited and may beimplemented in connection with different applications. The applicationcan be extended to other areas, for example authenticating methods. Theembodiments provide a broad concept of using a label that auto acquiresits credentials at the time of application, which can be adapted in asimilar verification system. The design can be carried further andimplemented in various forms and specifications.

This written description uses examples to describe the subject matterherein, including the best mode, and also to enable any person skilledin the art to make and use the subject matter. The patentable scope ofthe subject matter is defined by the claims, and may include otherexamples that occur to those skilled in the art. Such other examples areintended to be within the scope of the claims if they have structuralelements that do not differ from the literal language of the claims, orif they include equivalent structural elements with insubstantialdifferences from the literal language of the claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A system to enable verification of an object, thesystem comprising: a security label configured to be affixed to theobject and that includes: a scannable region configured to enabledetermination of a spatial orientation of the scannable region withrespect to a reference point external to the security label, wherein achange in the spatial orientation is indicative of tampering due to aremoval of the security label from the object, reorientation of thesecurity label on the object, replacement of the object, change inposition of the object, or replacement of the security label on theobject with another security label.
 2. The system of claim 1, whereinthe scannable region includes at least one pattern.
 3. The system ofclaim 2, wherein the at least one pattern includes at least oneimprinted pattern of a particular color and is disposed between a firstlayer of the security label with a first color different from theparticular color and a second layer of the security label with a secondcolor different from the particular and first colors, such that the atleast one imprinted pattern is invisible but becomes scannable by use ofa machine with a specific illumination.
 4. The system of claim 2,wherein the at least one pattern includes at least one invisibleimprinted pattern.
 5. The system of claim 2, wherein the at least onepattern includes at least one imprinted pattern that includesradio-opaque material disposed between multiple layers of the securitylabel.
 6. The system of claim 1, wherein the security label is visuallysymmetrical with respect to an orientation on a surface of the object onwhich the label is affixed.
 7. The system of claim 4, wherein thesecurity label has a circular shape.
 8. The system of claim 4, whereinthe change in the spatial orientation that is indicative tamperingincludes being indicative of counterfeiting.
 9. The system of claim 4,further comprising: a storage device configured to store a referenceimage that represents the spatial orientation; an imager deviceconfigured to obtain a subsequent image that represents the spatialorientation; and a monitor unit communicatively coupled to the storagedevice and the imager device, and configured to compare the obtainedsubsequent image with the reference image to determine whether thespatial orientation has changed, wherein the change in the spatialorientation is represented by a mismatch between the reference image andthe subsequent image.
 10. The system of claim 4, wherein to be affixedto the object, the security label is configured to be affixed to apackaging of the object.
 11. The system of claim 1, wherein thereference point external to the security label includes a referencepoint located on the object.
 12. The system of claim 1, wherein thereference point external to the security label includes a referencepoint located at a scannable region of another security label affixed tothe object.
 13. A system to enable verification of an object, the systemcomprising: a storage device configured to store a reference image thatrepresents a first spatial orientation, wherein the first spatialorientation is based on a spatial relationship between a pattern of asecurity label affixed to an object and a reference point on the objectexternal to the security label; and a monitor unit communicativelycoupled to the storage device, and configured to compare a subsequentimage with the reference image to determine whether the first spatialorientation has changed, wherein the change in the spatial orientationis represented by a mismatch between the reference image and thesubsequent image, wherein a change in the spatial orientation isindicative of tampering due to a removal of the security label from theobject, reorientation of the security label on the object, replacementof the object, change in position of the object, or replacement of thesecurity label on the object with another security label.
 14. The systemof claim 13, further comprising an imager device communicatively coupledto the monitor unit and configured to obtain the subsequent image and toprovide the subsequent image to the monitor unit, wherein the subsequentimage represents a second spatial orientation, wherein the secondspatial orientation is based on a spatial relationship that involves thereference point on the object external to the security label, andwherein the monitor unit is configured to determine that the firstspatial orientation has changed if there is a mismatch between the firstand second spatial orientations.
 15. The system of claim 13, wherein themonitor unit is configured to verify the object in response to a matchbetween the reference image and the subsequent image, and configured tofail verification of the object in response to the mismatch between thereference image and the subsequent image.
 16. The system of claim 13,wherein the spatial relationship between the pattern of the securitylabel and the reference point on the object external to the securitylabel includes a spatial relationship between the pattern of thesecurity label and a pattern of another security label affixed to theobject.
 17. A method to enable verification of an object, the methodcomprising: scanning a security label affixed to the object to obtain afirst spatial orientation, wherein the first spatial orientation isbased on a spatial relationship between the pattern and a referencepoint on the object external to the security label; determining a secondspatial orientation, wherein the second spatial orientation is based ona spatial relationship that involves the reference point on the objectexternal to the security label; verifying the object in response to amatch between the first and second spatial orientations; and failingverification of the object in response to a mismatch between the firstand second spatial orientations, the mismatch being due to a removal ofthe security label from the object, reorientation of the security labelon the object, replacement of the object, change in position of theobject, or replacement of the security label on the object with anothersecurity label.
 18. The method of claim 17, wherein scanning thesecurity label to obtain the first spatial orientation includes scanningthe security label to obtain a spatial relationship between the patternand a pattern of another security label affixed to the object.
 19. Themethod of claim 17, further comprising: storing, in a storage device, afirst image that represents the first spatial orientation; generating asecond image that represents the second spatial orientation; andcomparing the generated second image with the stored first image todetermine whether there is a match between the stored first image andthe generated second image, wherein verification of the object occurs inresponse to a match between the stored first image and the generatedsecond image, and wherein failure of verification of the object occursin response to a mismatch between the stored first image and thegenerated second image.
 20. A security label usable with the method ofclaim 17.